Re: [9fans] docfonts problem
do you have the fonts? they do not come with plan9port, because the postscript fonts cannot be redistributed except with plan 9 itself. turns out no. Here is a sticky question (one I will likely have to write Bigelow Holmes for final clarification), but if I write a script (portage ebuild) which downloads and extracts the fonts into plan9port so all this works. Is this a violation of their license? I would not be redistributing it, but would this be considered a derivative work? where would the script download them from? whoever makes them available for download separate from plan 9 is violating that license. further, this kind of dancing on the edge of a knife approach to software licensing is not typically looked kindly upon by the distributions. i bet gentoo would object if they found out. honestly, i wouldn't play these games. bigelow holmes granted plan9port a license to distribute plan 9's lucida bitmap fonts as long as they were named something other than lucida (that's why the directories are named luc instead of lucida), and that same license explicitly excluded plan 9's lucida sans postscript fonts. they were very gracious about licensing even the bitmap fonts when there was little benefit to them other than good will. instead of violating the spirit and possibly the letter of both licenses, i would suggest that you use the postscript fonts that i substituted in their place, namely luxi sans, also by bigelow holmes. the ms macros that ship with plan9port use them if you start your document with .FP luxisans they have equally good unicode coverage and a similar look to lucida sans. if you do write such a script to pull the lucida fonts out automatically and drop them in, please don't use the name plan9port to describe the resulting software. i don't want any part of it. thanks. russ
Re: [9fans] docfonts problem
As I said, I would ask Bigelow Holmes for final clarification before releasing anything. I am not trying to dance around the license, but get clarification on what is OK. I have made it a habit of asking people here, and elsewhere, if there they would mind if I do something in a particular way. I have even caught flack for asking 9fans before showing them the code, but it is exactly this kind of toe stepping that I like to avoid. I could go through the dance steps of how portage can download multiple source trees to build stuff, but you have made it quite clear how you feel about it. Now for the problem behind all this. I am basically required to use troff for formatting the iwp9 paper submissions. I have asked repeatedly for the a TeX macros, or the source for an acceptable macro.ms equivalents. All of these requests have been greeted with silence because someone, and I would have to guess who, is discouraging the use of TeX for these submissions. Frankly troff has been a pain, and I do not use it for anything else, and will not except for necessary plan9 related documentation. Thanks for the work around BTW, but next time I rebuild plan9port it will be blown away unless I add these dance steps to the ebuilds. See the chicken ant the egg problem? As for Gentoo, I would have to go through a formal review before having them added to any repository AND the licensing field in portage ebuilds explicitly contain all the licenses of the software used to build the programs. So, gentoo would know right off -- I would not hide it. Also, there are ebuilds for proprietary closed-source programs in gentoo, though not many. On Sun, 12 Sep 2010 11:42:13 -0400, Russ Cox r...@swtch.com wrote: do you have the fonts? they do not come with plan9port, because the postscript fonts cannot be redistributed except with plan 9 itself. turns out no. Here is a sticky question (one I will likely have to write Bigelow Holmes for final clarification), but if I write a script (portage ebuild) which downloads and extracts the fonts into plan9port so all this works. Is this a violation of their license? I would not be redistributing it, but would this be considered a derivative work? where would the script download them from? whoever makes them available for download separate from plan 9 is violating that license. further, this kind of dancing on the edge of a knife approach to software licensing is not typically looked kindly upon by the distributions. i bet gentoo would object if they found out. honestly, i wouldn't play these games. bigelow holmes granted plan9port a license to distribute plan 9's lucida bitmap fonts as long as they were named something other than lucida (that's why the directories are named luc instead of lucida), and that same license explicitly excluded plan 9's lucida sans postscript fonts. they were very gracious about licensing even the bitmap fonts when there was little benefit to them other than good will. instead of violating the spirit and possibly the letter of both licenses, i would suggest that you use the postscript fonts that i substituted in their place, namely luxi sans, also by bigelow holmes. the ms macros that ship with plan9port use them if you start your document with .FP luxisans they have equally good unicode coverage and a similar look to lucida sans. if you do write such a script to pull the lucida fonts out automatically and drop them in, please don't use the name plan9port to describe the resulting software. i don't want any part of it. thanks. russ
Re: [9fans] docfonts problem
Now for the problem behind all this. I am basically required to use troff for formatting the iwp9 paper submissions. I have asked repeatedly for the a TeX macros, or the source for an acceptable macro.ms equivalents. All of these requests have been greeted with silence because someone, and I would have to guess who, is discouraging the use of TeX for these submissions. Frankly troff has been a pain, and I do not use it for anything else, and will not except for necessary plan9 related documentation. Thanks for the work around BTW, but next time I rebuild plan9port it will be blown away unless I add these dance steps to the ebuilds. See the chicken ant the egg problem? It's just not that hard to use the iwp9 macros with plan9port. They work fine, and if you put .FP luxisans at the top of your ms file you can get a nice-looking BH-designed sans serif font too. And then when you submit the source to them you or they can delete that one line. It's easy. Or you can run 9vx pointed at a real Plan 9 ISO image and run Plan 9 in all its glory. That's easy too. You're making things a lot harder than they need to be. Russ
Re: [9fans] docfonts problem
It's just not that hard to use the iwp9 macros with plan9port. They work fine, and if you put .FP luxisans at the top of your ms file you can get a nice-looking BH-designed sans serif font too. And then when you submit the source to them you or they can delete that one line. It's easy. and as far as I know you are the first to document this little gem. Thank you. Or you can run 9vx pointed at a real Plan 9 ISO image and run Plan 9 in all its glory. That's easy too. that was about to be my next step, but I haven't been using 9vx for much of anything for awhile because it does everything in a single core and I want to test how well things work on multi-cores. So, I'm trying to work with mainly one toolset -- in this case plan9port.
Re: [9fans] docfonts problem
this doesn't work for me either on p9p, but it does work under plan 9. it's a font problem. do you have the fonts? they do not come with plan9port, because the postscript fonts cannot be redistributed except with plan 9 itself. i believe that if you copy /sys/lib/postscript/font/* to /usr/local/plan9/postscript/font then it should behave the same way in both places. russ
